FSL negative would not dent the prosecution’s case when child’s testimony inspires confidence: Delhi HC Upholds Sentence Under POCSO

“Section 29 POCSO presumption operates once foundational facts are proved; mere forensic inconclusiveness cannot shatter a credible child witness.” - Delhi High Court (Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri) dismissed affirmed conviction for aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Sections 5(m), (n) & (p) punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, upholding the sentence of 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment with ₹5,000 fine. The Court reiterated that a reliable, confidence-inspiring child witness can sustain a conviction even where forensic reports do not detect semen/DNA, especially when medical findings corroborate the narration.

The prosecution case began on September 22, 2019, when the victim’s mother reported that the appellant—an employee of her husband and a co-occupant—sexually assaulted her six-year-old son in their one-room accommodation. The child’s cries awakened her; she saw his underwear removed and the appellant’s zipper open. The appellant fled, allegedly taking cash and an ATM card. The child was taken to SGM Hospital. Charges under Sections 5(m)(n)(p)/6 POCSO (and in the alternative Section 377 IPC) and Section 380 IPC were framed on March 23, 2022; fourteen witnesses were examined, including the child (PW-1) and his parents (PW-3 and PW-4). The Trial Court convicted on October 21, 2023 and sentenced him on January 15, 2024.

The defence questioned the reliability of the child and his mother, pointing to alleged “improvements” between the Section 164 CrPC statements and depositions; it argued the offence was “improbable” in a 25-sq-yard house and stressed that the FSL found no semen/DNA on the anal swab or clothes. The State responded that the “improvements” were never confronted to the witnesses during trial; the child was competent and unequivocal about penile penetration; and the medical record corroborated his version.

The Court found the child’s testimony steady on the core fact of penetration and noted that the so-called contradictions were not put to the witnesses in cross-examination, blunting the appellant’s challenge. It underscored the medical corroboration—“Fissure present at 12 o’clock… Bleeding positive… Anal tone increased.”—and held that negative FSL results do not, by themselves, defeat a credible case of sexual assault. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Court emphasised that “there is no requirement of law to insist upon corroboration of the statement of a victim of sexual assault to base conviction,” and that the testimony of a child victim, if trustworthy, can ground conviction. It further clarified the operation of Section 29 POCSO: the Court shall presume commission of the offence once the prosecution proves foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt; the accused may then rebut on preponderance, which the appellant failed to do.

The Bench recorded the child’s straightforward account, including his statement—“uncle ne apna susu meri poti wali jagah mein dala tha”—given consistently in material respects. The mother’s testimony about finding the child’s underwear lowered and the appellant’s zipper open, and the immediate disclosure by the child, was found natural and credible. The MLC from SGM Hospital noted: “Fissure present at 12 o’clock; Bleeding positive; Anal tone increased.” The Court expressly held that “even though the FSL has not found the samples to be matched… the same by itself would not dent the prosecution’s case, as the MLC corroborates the deposition of the child victim,” reiterating that once the child’s testimony inspires confidence, “the inconclusive medical or forensic report would not shatter the prosecution’s case.”

On the Section 29 presumption, the Court cited the Supreme Court’s recent Sambhubhai Raisangbhai Padhiyar v. State of Gujarat to reaffirm that the presumption arises only after foundational facts are established—and, in this case, those facts stood proved through the victim’s and mother’s testimonies read with the MLC. The appellant’s theory of false implication over money disputes, the “small house” improbability, and the non-examination of a neighbour were all rejected as insubstantial in the face of consistent ocular and medical evidence and the absence of proper confrontation on alleged contradictions.

Concluding, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirmed the conviction and sentence, cancelled the appellant’s bail bonds, and directed him to surrender immediately before the Jail Superintendent. Directions were issued to communicate the judgment to the Trial Court and the Jail authorities for compliance.

Reaffirming settled principles in child sexual assault prosecutions, the Delhi High Court has held that a trustworthy child witness, duly found competent, can be the fulcrum of conviction; a negative FSL report does not override credible ocular and medical evidence. With foundational facts established, the Section 29 POCSO presumption applied “in full force,” and the appellant failed to rebut it even on a preponderance of probabilities. The conviction and 20-year sentence therefore stand.

Date of Decision: August 12, 2025